Soon after Val Kilmer played cinematic man-whore John Holmes, Angelina Jolie has decided to play Linda Lovelace! What is it with these porn star biopics? It's like a whole new genre.

I think Hollywood is going to try and dramatically document the lives of every Seppolian stunt-cock and boff-babe who ever lived. Considering how vast the smut industry is, was, and will be, methinks that -- not unlike numerous John Holmes' co-stars -- these moguls might have, er, bitten off a tad more than they can chew.

More evidence that fame and celebrity aren't all they're cracked up to be.

Now these guys have just got way too much time on their hands, I reckon.

Tim Blair asks a good question: if Carmen is so pissed off with Labor's direction of late, why doesn't she resign from the whole party? The answer: she has no spine, of course. Her modus operandi is always the same: pompous self-aggrandisement, sanctimonious squittering, crocodile tears and victimism. Carmen always spits the dummy, but never leaves the creche.

Like all feminist bimbos she's not truly independent, but a simpering ingenue who demands -- and invariably receives -- special consideration from the blokes in her party. But the Liberal women? They wipe the floor with her every time. It's so odd that these chicks -- who ask for no special privileges and quietly, competently get on with the gig -- are presented as the anti-feminists. The irony is too cruel for words.

PS: The other obvious question is: Considering how unpopular the silly Stalinist bint is, why doesn't Simon Crean just tell her to show some guts and piss off entirely. If he did this instead of being so ameliatory he might actually get some support from the electorate.

Bonehead.

Andrew Sullivan describes exactly why all that PC squittering about the Islamo-fascist rampage after the Miss World comp was so friggin' nauseating.

Those wacky animal rights nuts are at it again. Here they compare the slaughtering of farm animals to the serial killing of women.

The PETA peckerheads would say that they don't want to lower the rights of humans, just raise the rights of animals. But it's clear from this case that raising the rights of animals automatically lowers the rights of humans. That is, if we believe this guff about meat being murder, and it's thwocked into millions of impressionable people for long enough, then not only will beasties be seen as inherently worthwhile as people (a scary thought) but their brutal behaviour will be perceived as somehow benign, or at least acceptable. Look at the ferndamentalist ferals. Like animals, they treat each other like shit.

Civilization is constructed against nature. Pull it down and you let nature back in. We can't let this happen.

So I exhort you all to stand up for human rights. Kill an animal rights nut today!

The SMH story is titled: "Garrett's new gig a mystery". Ooh, spooky.

One paragraph states: "It was announced yesterday that Peter Garrett, Midnight Oil's lead singer, was quitting the band after 25 years to 'immerse myself in those things which are of deep concern to me and which I have been unable to fully apply myself to up to now'."

Wonderwhatit'sgonnabe...

Let me think... "Things which are of deep concern to me and which I have been unable to fully apply myself to up to now."

I know! He's finally gonna learn how to write good song lyrics and sing in tune!

And won't that be a fucken relief.

Perhaps I shouldn't tell you this, since I'm worried I might get sprung by the Internet police or something. But I'm actually not online from home, so I update my blog from a public library. (I know, that's something a leftie might do. But I like to think of myself as the exception that proves the rule. Also, it doesn't seem illegal since the rule is: no chat or e-mail. Blogging is neither.)

Anyway, whenever I'm in here there are always these weird old blokes walking around in shorts being really unpleasant to the staff. They're very rude and obstructive to other library-goers, and you practically have to drag them off their seats so you can use the PC you've booked. And they all play computer chess.

Is this some sort of secret society? Or could it be yet more unpleasant societal fallout from the Whitlam era? Who knows. Whatever the reason, it's weird as all get out. I'm gonna describe this phenomenon to Desmond Morris in an e-mail. He might want to make a documentary about it.

I've mentioned this guy before, but I thought I'd do so again. He's been in fine form of late. The post "Yep, they need a homeland" (Nov 27) had me laughing out loud.

Speaking of Bob the Boulder, here's another couple of thoughts (extensions on a previous post) on his recent comments about terrorism:

So he says that Howard shouldn't warn us about a vague threat, since it will lead to complacency if no attacks occur. As I wrote before, that's ridiculous. The rational argument against a vague and ultimately false warning would be that it would lead to unnecessary panic, not complacency.

Also, if Howard issues no warning because he doesn't want to panic (or, taking Bob's advice, make overly complacent) the populace, and then an attack does occur, then bloody everyone -- Bob included -- will yell, "Why weren't we told?".

So obviously issuing the warning was not only the wisest thing for us. It was the wisest for Howard. He had no other alternative.

But Bob the Boulder's idiocy doesn't end there. He recently said that we should investigate what was known of possible threats before Bali. So, retrospectively, he's saying, "Howard. Why weren't we warned?"

Astonishing! Since now, he's saying, "Even if you have knowledge of a threat, don't warn us."

This is typical fluffy wuffy "thought": Take any posture, no matter how absurd and self-contradictory it is, as long as it puts your nemesis in the worst possible light.

It's not just irrational. It's anti-rational. Not surprising, since Bob the Boulder is anti just about everything. He's anti-reason, anti-democracy, anti-technology, anti-civilization, anti-humanity. About the only thing he's for is being a friggin' peckerhead. (Oh, and dancing with the bilbies, of course.)

I've just found a nickname for Bob Brown. It's "Bob the Boulder". Why? Because, not unlike this character, his acolytes are infantile. (Also 'cause his IQ is equivalent to the average igneous rock, and he wants to take us back to the Stone Age.)

Just an amendment to yesterday's post about GM food aid being taken away from Zambia: It might have seemed as if I thought that ferndamentalists were entirely responsible for the tragic balls-up. Well, I know that's not the case. The Zambian government made the final, stupid decision to reject the food. But the ferndies still contributed significantly to it, no doubt. So I can still be pissed off with them, okay?

Expect some really shat-off chanting from the Hare Krishnas in the coming weeks.